A 19th century French engraving idealizes the conquest of Algeria as a showering of the benefits of superior civilization on abject, genuflecting North Africans.
: http://suppressedhistories.net/articles/racism_history.html RACISM, HISTORY AND LIES © 2000 Max Dashu
Some doctrines of racial supremacy as classically taught
in Euro/American institutions, textbooks and media:
PHYSICAL CALIBRATION DOCTRINE: In which white anthropologists treat people as racial specimens, measuring "cephalic indices" and attempting to prove superiority of the "white" brain. Ugly racist terminology: "prognathism," "platyrhiny," "steatopygous," "sub-Egyptian." Mug-shot lineups of "the Veddan female," "Arapaho male, "Negroid type," "Mongoloid specimen" chacterize this approach. Out of favor in the mid-20th-century, it has enjoyed a revisionist comeback with sociobiology and works claiming racial differentials in intelligence, such as "The Bell Curve."
TECHOLOGICAL CALIBRATION DOCTRINE: Insists on forcing archaeological finds as well as living cultures into a grid of "development" based on the use of certain tools, materials and techniques valued by "Western" scholars. Example: "They were a stone age civilization who never discovered the wheel!" Forces cultures into a progressional paradigm: Old and New Stone Ages, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Industrial Revolution, Space Age. This classification ignores the complexity of culture, and the fact that metallurgic technology and military might are not the ultimate measure of advanced culture.
STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT DOCTRINE: The assumption that "primitive" cultures represent lower "stages" in historical evolution, and have yet to attain advanced forms of culture. One English scholar referred to "the child-races of Africa." Usually, social hierarchy, militarization and industrialization are taken as measures of "advanced" civilizations. In the 19th century, scholars openly used the terms "savage," "barbarian," "civilized." Though these offensive words have (mostly) been dropped, the underlying assumptions are still quite influential.
SPREAD OF CIVILIZATION DOCTRINE: Credits all achievements to conquering empires, assuming their superiority in science, technology, and government. Adherents are usually incapable of perceiving advanced earth-friendly systems of land management, agronomy, medicine, collective social welfare networks, healing, astronomical knowledge, or profound philosophical traditions of peoples considered "primitive" by dominant "Western" standards.
PASSING OF THE TORCH DOCTRINE: Claims a chain of cultural transmission from Mesopotamia and Egypt to Greece to Rome to western Europe to the USA, leaving vast gaps where the history of the rest of the world should be. (The discussion never returns to Egypt or Iraq to consider what happened there after the fall of their ancient empires.) Most of the planet's cultures are discussed only in relation to the European conquest, if mentioned at all. As a result, few people have any idea of the history of Sumatra, Honduras, Niger, Ecuador, Mozambique, Ohio, Hokkaido, Samoa, or even European countries such as Lithuania or Bosnia.
IF IT WAS GREAT, IT MUST HAVE BEEN WHITE: If advanced science, art, or architecture is found in Africa or South America, then Phoenecians, Greeks, Celts, Vikings (or, in the extreme case, space aliens) must be invoked to explain their presence. (Here, whiteness often functions as a relative concept, as "lighter than.") This bias gives rise to a pronounced tendency to date American or African cultures later than warranted, and as a result dating is constantly having to be revised further back into the past as evidence of greater antiquity piles up.
Corollary: IF IT WAS WHITE, IT MUST HAVE BEEN GREAT. Thus, the conqueror Charlemagne was a great man, in spite of his genocidal campaign against the Saxons, but the Asian conquerors Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan were simply evil. Stereotypes of head-hunters picture Africans (in the absence of any evidence for the practice) but never Celtic head-hunters in France and Britain -- much less Lord Kitchener making off with the Mahdi's skull in Sudan, or U.S. settlers taking scalps and body parts of Indian people. This doctrine also underlies the common assumption that European conquest must have improved life for subject peoples.
A 19th century French engraving idealizes the conquest of Algeria as a showering of the benefits of superior civilization on abject, genuflecting North Africans.
IF IT WAS NOT WHITE, AND ITS GREATNESS IS UNDENIABLE, THEN IT MUST BE DEPRECATED IN SOME WAY: Example:The Epic of Man, published in the '60s by Time/Life Books, says of the advanced civilization of ancient Pakistan: "It is known that a static and sterile quality pervaded Indus society." It used to be the academic fashion to call ancient Egypt a "moribund" civilization which "stifled creativity." Similar writings dismissed the "Incas" (Quechua) as "totalitarian," or the Chinese as "isolated" and "resistant to change."
The AFRICAN GAP DOCTRINE: After examining the first humans hundreds of thousands of years ago, this historical approach completely skips over most of the African archaeological record. It discusses ancient Egypt but ascribes its civilization to "the Middle East," denying its African identity and archaeological connections with Saharan and southern Nilotic civilizations. Saharan civilization, Ile-Ife or Mwanamutapa are not discussed at all. Africa is simply dropped from historical consideration until the era of European slaving and colonization.
The BERING STRAIT DOCTRINE insists that all indigenous American peoples came across a land bridge between Siberia and Alaska, filtering down through Central America into South America. Problem: numerous archaeological sites in the Americas predate any possible Bering Strait migration by many thousands of years. Access from Alaska to the rest of North America was blocked for millennia by two great ice sheets that covered Canada. An narrow opening that might have allowed passage appeared much too late (about 13,500 years ago) to explain the growing evidence that people were living in both North and South America much earlier than these "first" migrations.
By 1997-98, the tide of opinion began to turn: several scientific conclaves declared that a majority of attending scholars rejected the Bering Strait theory as a full explanation of how the Americas were peopled.The long-doctrinal hypothesis of Clovis hunters as the first immigrants is crumbling before the new dating, as hundreds of pre-Clovis sites pile up: Cactus Hill, Virginia (13,500 BP); Meadowcroft Rock Shelter in Pennsylvania (14,000 - 17,000 Before Present); Monte Verde (12,500 BP); Pedra-Furada, Brazil (15,000 BP, and possibly as old as 32,000 BP).
Bering Strait diehards discount the oral histories of indigenous Americans, such as Hopi accounts of migrations across "stepping-stones" in the Pacific. In spite of the huge diversity among the American peoples and differences between most Americans and east Asians, all are declared to be of "Mongoloid racial origin." After the initial press stampede declaring "Kennewick Man" to be "white," study of the genetic evidence shows something entirely different. Instead, it appears that there have been several waves of migration: from central China, from the ancient Jomon culture of Japan, from south Asia or the Pacific islands. And "Luzia," an 11,500-year-old female skeleton in Brazil "appeared to be more Negroid in its cranial features than Mongoloid," in the stodgy anthropological terminology of the New York Times (Nov 9, 1999). But there is also a uniquely North American X-haploid group of mitochondrial DNA, which could uphold American Indian traditions of origins in North America.
THE POWER OF NAMING
STEREOTYPING entire peoples as mad, uncontrollable threats: "Wild Indians," "Yellow Hordes" or "the Yellow Peril." As inferior nonhumans: "primitives," "savages," "gooks," "niggers" -- this last term used not only against African-Americans, but also by English colonizers of Egypt and India. Even the word "natives," which originally meant simply the people born in a country and by extension the aboriginal inhabitants, took on heavy racist coloration as an inferior Other.
POLARIZATION: "Scientific thought" vs. "primitive belief"; "undeveloped" vs "civilized"; or "the world's great religions" vs. "tribal superstitions," "cults," "idolatry" or "devil-worship." Depending on where it was created, a sculpture could either be a "masterpiece of religious art" or an "idol," "fetish," or "devil." Few people realize that "Western" scientists did not match the accuracy of ancient Maya calculations of the length of the solar year until the mid-20th century.
Indians who resist colonization and land theft are commonly portrayed as evil in popular media, which applies negative labels such as "Renegades."
RENAMING: Dutch colonists called the Khoi-khoi people "Hottentots" (stutterers). Russians called the northwest Siberian Nentsy "Samoyed" (cannibals). These are blatant examples, but many nationalities are still called by unflattering names given by their enemies: "Sioux" (Lakota); "Miao" (Hmong); "Lapps" (Saami); "Basques" (Euskadi); "Eskimos" (Inuit). European names have replaced the originals in many places: Nigeria, Australia, New Caledonia, New Britain, etc. (But "Rhodesia" bit the dust.)
DEGRADATION OF MEANINGS: "Mumbo jumbo" has become a cliché signifying meaningless superstitions, but it comes from a Mandinke word -- mama dyambo -- for a ritual staff bearing the image of a female ancestor. (Look it up in any good dictionary.) "Fetish" now connotes an obsessive sexual fixation, but originated as a Portuguese interpretation of sacred West African images as "sorcery" (feitição). The holy city of Islam is often appropriated in phrases like "a Mecca for shoppers."
DOUBLE-THINK: Conquest becomes "unification," "pacification,""opening up," and conquered regions are dubbed "protectorates." The convention is to use Europe as the standard, writing texts from the viewpoint of the conquerors / colonizers. Thus, a Rajasthani rebellion against English rule was termed the "Indian Mutiny." A peculiarity of this thinking is the tendency to refer to times of bloody invasions and enslavement with respectful affection, as in "The Golden Age of Greece" and "The Glory That Was Rome," or "How the West Was Won." British subjugation of southern Nigeria is recast as The Pacification of the Primitive Tribes of the Lower Niger.
A contributor to Men Become Civilized, edited by Trevor Cairns explains it all to children:
"When the king of one city conquered others, he would have to make sure that all the people in all the cities knew what to do. He would have to see that they all had rules to follow, so that they would live peacefully together."
Double-think finds ways to recast genocide as regrettable but necessary, due to failings of the people being killed, who are somehow unable to "adapt." Distancing the agent is key here, obscuring the violence with the idea that some kind of natural process is at work: "vanishing races," "by that time the Indians had disappeared."
THE POWER OF IMAGES
Hollywood tomtoms beat as fake Indians jump up and down, uttering brainless cries and grunts. There's the "squaw" complex in literature and cinema, the faithful Indian sidekick, and Robinson Crusoe's "Man Friday." John Wayne as the Western movie hero, saying: "There's humans and then there's Comanches." Or in real life, justifying settler theft of Indian countries: "There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves."
This picture appeared in an ad for insurance. Advertising is an important transmitter of historical misrepresentation. It draws on colonial mythologies such as the notion that the Dutch "bought" Manhattan for the equivalent of $24 in trade goods --in spite of the fact that the Indians did not think of land as something that could be sold. The role of violence (including massacres after which Staten Island settlers played football with Wappinger heads) is obliterated.
Tarzan goes up against witch doctors and eye-rolling African chiefs. The Caribbean shown as full of fearful, superstitious natives and zombies, Arabs who have nothing to do all day but loll around in harems, or cheat the white hero. Seductive Suzie Wongs, thieving Mexicans, and shiftless and sexually insatiable African-Americans. Movies depicting the Chinese as obsequious and deceitful, Arabs as treacherous, Africans as ignorant and barbaric.
COUNTERPOINT
The Mande were farming millet and other crops in West Africa in 6500-5000 BCE.
Temples in Peru and India are much older than the Parthenon.
People in Mississippi, Illinois and Mexico traded with each other and exchanged ideas and symbols, as the the sea-faring Ecuadorians did with Costa Rica and western Mexico.
A small-statured Black people built the oldest civilization in southeast Asia, leaving megalithic temples and statuary in south India, Cambodia, Sumatra and other Indonesian islands.
Archaeology shows that the formative influences on ancient Egypt came from Sudan and the Sahara, not the "Middle East."
The oldest megalithic calendar in the world has recently been discovered in the Egyptian Sahara, dating back to 7000 years ago. European megaliths (which spread from the south) may have an African origin.
Polynesian mariners had begun navigating by the stars and settling the vast ocean expanses of the Pacific islands before the time of Moses.
WHAT IS DEFINED AS HISTORY?
In the last half century the boundaries of "acceptable" history have been expanded by a multidisciplinary approach, including sources previously dismissed: orature (oral tradition), linguistics, anthropology, social history, art, music and other cultural sources. More recently, the social locations of historians have come under consideration as a factor shaping their perspectives, along with a sense that there is no absolutely "objective" view of history. Past claims of objectivity have biases clearly visible today, notably in siding with European settlers and slavers against non-christian cultures, and the almost total eclipse of female acts and experience from historical accounts.
A reader who might react negatively to a blatant expression of racism often misses perceiving one cloaked in scholarly language, in assumptions, judgements and misinformation most people have not been educated to catch. It does not occur to many people to question a pronounced overemphasis on Europe, the smallest continent (actually, a subcontinent of Asia.) If a chapter or two on African and Asian history is inserted in a textbook, publishers go ahead and call it a world history. Typically, media depictions of history have not caught up with information now available in specialized academic sources, and continue to present the old stereotypes and distortions as fact.
BARBARIANS AT THE GATES
In the early '90s a hue and cry was raised in the national media against "multiculturalism." It threatened the very foundations of Western Civilization, explained an outpouring of magazine articles and newspaper columns which shed much heat but little light. A Newsweek cover blared: "THOUGHT POLICE: There's a 'Politically Correct' Way to Talk About Race, Sex and Ideas. Is This the New Enlightenment -- Or the New McCarthyism?" As if this wasn't heavy-handed enough, it adds a warning, "Watch What You Say." (December 24, 1990)
"In U.S. classrooms, battles are flaring over values that are almost a reverse image of the American mainstream. As a result, a new intolerance is on the rise." William A. Henry III, "Upside Down in the Groves of Academe", Time Magazine, April 1, 1991
"'It used to be thought that ideas transcend race, gender and class, that there are such things as truth, reason, morality and artistic excellence, which can be understood and aspired to by everyone, of whatever race, gender or class.' Now we have democracy in the syllabus, affirmative action in the classroom. 'No one believes in greatness.' Bate says mournfully. 'That's gone.'" Op-Ed, New York Times Magazine, by Gertrude Himmelfarb, June 5, 1991
"If there is insufficient authentic African culture to meet the demands of self-esteem, then culture must be borrowed from ancient Egypt. No black pharaohs? A few must be invented. Not enough first-rate women poets? Let second-raters be taught instead." James Kilpatrick, "Poisoning the Groves of Academe," San Francisco Chronicle, April 15, 1991
The assumption that were are no great women poets, no black pharaohs, no other greatness than the usual diet of "Western Civilization" is so ingrained that it is regarded as incontrovertible. Protesting the monochrome, all-male landscape of classic pedagogy becomes "intolerance." But what then are we to call the refusal to open up media and educational horizons to the full spectrum of human achievement?
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 10 March 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Nicely written article.
Thankyou! I just happen to have the luck to stuble on it!
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Every ounce of modern civilization now in third world nations was brought there by the British Empire of american corporations. Thats not racism it is simply a fact. When the global frontier opened around 1500 Europe began to spread modernism around the globe. It is a process that is reaching maturity today and is accepted as gospel by historians everywhere.
I never said it wasn't a fact! The British Empire was just that, an empire. They colonized countries around the world. Yes, in the end they may have helped these nations by introducing more advanced technology, but do you really think that was their purpose was to help the natives?
No, their purpose was to help themselves! What you don't understand is that many of the native economies of these colonized countries suffered because of the colonization, and the only way the natives could succeed was by depending on their colonizers.
But this is not the purpose of this thread. The sole purpose of this thread is to educate peoples, especially whites like yourself, about the major biases of so-called Western History. This topic goes out especially to you "Horemheb," since you yourself seem to be caught up in all the nonsense that this article exposes.
You actually claimed that there was no such thing as Eurocentrism and that it was made up by "black radicals," when the facts are that almost all groups of people are ethnocentric regardless of race or creed. Many peoples have seen themselves as the center of the world, but Europeans of all people are guilty of this, since recently in history they gained world power and pre-eminence. "Black-radicals" of the 20th century U.S. weren't the first ones to realize this. Black peoples everywhere in the Americas and in Africa, aboriginal Australians and it's not just black people but peoples in the Middle-East, Central Asia, South Asia especially India, China, basically all people of color!! And that's a lot of people. Even white Westerners have recently become aware of their racial and cultural bias.
In actuality it's really silly to deny Eurocentrism yet acknowledge the existence of racism! That's because racism and white supremacy is a direct product of Eurocentrism. To deny Eurocentrism but acknowledge racism, is like denying that a child has ever had parents.
The main thing is that what you apparently don't understand is this is not an "attack" on the West or some "bashing" on the West as you and others like you are fond presuming. This is more like an attack on the past and continuing mistakes of racial and cultural bias, both in history as well as in social practices! I do not "hate" the West or Westerner, because I myself live in West as a Westerner. I live in the greatest nation in the world, the good old US of A and am proud of it!! I acknowledge that the "West" was founded by white Europeans and, in fact, I am also grateful for all the achievements and positive things those Europeans have done! The U.S. has gives me freedom that many countries in the world do not allow. It was white men who came up with these ideals that have been made a reality for many (but with harder work for some.) What I denounce are the negative and overall wrong impacts the West has had and am hoping we, as Westerners can improve them!
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Djehuti, Some very good writing, I must say. I think you are a very idealistic man, and that is not all bad. I'm leaving for the weekend and I want to continue this discussion on Monday. Let me leave you with this thought:
*** when in the history of the human race has the stronger power, anywher on the globe, not tried to dominate the weaker?
the left in the west has a major philosophical flaw and it goes to the heart of your concerns.....can man be perfected from an ethical standpoint. History tells us that it cannot. I suggest reading 'The Prince' by Machavelli ... that is the way humanity has always worked and always will.
Its not pretty but its true.
What you say is true!
Throughout human history, people regardless of race have sought power and domination, and unfortunately this was attained by subjegation and oppression other peoples. The problem is that some Afrocentrics who claim that such attitudes are solely those of Europeans, when in fact, many peoples throughout the world are guilty of it even some Africans!
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 11 March 2005).]
Interesting observations but do you think history should have a moral dimension. If not, then do you make a distinction between killing a human being and killing a mosquito? Or do you think that seizing a piece of land to plant crops that is already used by birds and wild goats is no different than doing the same to humans?
If you think that history has a moral dimension then how would you have liked to have been one of the millions slaughtered and captured by the West to make North America, South America, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Kenya, Algeria, etc. to make those lands habitable for "free Westerners"--now awake after a thousand years of slavery?
Finally, if you think history shouldn't have a moral dimension then do you believe that the mistake Germany made during WWII was just to have lost the war? If Germany had won WWII then everything would have been just fine for the Germans and the Holocaust would have only been a minor feature of the war--agree? So do you think that the Holocaust was "just history in motion"? Or Leopold of Belgium's slaughter of 10 million Congolese as "those people were just standing in the way of progress. The Western world just had to have as much rubber as possible for the sake of capitalism and Western econmic growth"?
So do you see any difference between a Germany victorious after WWII and the West(America, Canada, Australia, UK, France, Europe in general...)victorious after its slaughters, enslavements, mineral, resources, and land thefts since 1492? If not, then how do you really feel to be a "man of the West" now?
.....they have attacked other groups physically and psychologically mercilessly for hundreds of years....call it what it is.
While most sit numb and dumb to what the West does to the world enviroment and non-white people, others act.....like the Chinese for example, because they know full well what the West are about. To combat the west u need to know they are the enemy and will respect nothing but power
If u don't Name and Shame the west for what it is u will be doomed to never break those chains of mental slavery they shackle non-whites with to replace the physical domination they had in the past.
I know what the West means to people that are Non-White......ask a Native American or do they suffer from poor perception of self and widespread alcoholism as a product of their own culture.....ask some other indigenous peoples what the West did to their culture........and still does on a psychological level.......or do u think all those black men in the USA are in Jail because of the genetics of blackness thats leads them to jail in far greater numbers than any other group?
quote:
Originally posted by Obenga:
Why are some of u so unwilling to separate the "White West" from the behaviour of other groups.....they have attacked other groups physically and psychologically mercilessly for hundreds of years....call it what it is.
While most sit numb and dumb to what the West does to the world enviroment and non-white people, others act.....like the Chinese for example, because they know full well what the West are about. To combat the west u need to know they are the enemy and will respect nothing but power
If u don't Name and Shame the west for what it is u will be doomed to never break those chains of mental slavery they shackle non-whites with to replace the physical domination they had in the past.
I know what the West means to people that are Non-White......ask a Native American or do they suffer from poor perception of self and widespread alcoholism as a product of their own culture.....ask some other indigenous peoples what the West did to their culture........and still does on a psychological level.......or do u think all those black men in the USA are in Jail because of the genetics of blackness thats leads them to jail in far greater numbers than any other group?
good points.
Morality is a fundamental component of intelligence. Lacking morality one lacks intelligence. Actually explains quite a bit in your case, and giving you a copy of Machiavelli's the Prince - is like giving a firecracker to a retarded child.
Also this thread is not about the ways of power, but the fact that history has been misinterpreted time and again by the West due to biases.
[This message has been edited by Horemheb (edited 28 September 2005).]
I wonder if we will be a little more mercifull the next time around, when the rolls are turned.....
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
How has history been misinterpreted? Look, Since 1500 Europeans have been the dominant cutural center in the world. They have literally created the modern world we live in today. You cannot spin it anyother way.
We can spend hours talking about all the reasons why it happened the way it did but the fact is, it happened.
This is not a racial matter, its a cultural matter. American Indians lost North America because in a clash between two cultures the stronger culture won....AS THEY ALWAYS DO.
You have turned a historical fact into an obsession.[This message has been edited by Horemheb (edited 28 September 2005).]
actually the american indian lost for the same reason Africans were enslaved......
GUN POWDER..........THE MUSKET.....and the mass production thereof.........
even then they were freed from their renewed state of catatonia by the moors (Afrasians) - twice enlightened......with their first universities and even running water....even windows at their homes were brought during the dark ages from afar...not to mention bathing.....(lol)
[This message has been edited by AFROCENTRIST32 (edited 28 September 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by AFROCENTRIST32:
actually the american indian lost for the same reason Africans were enslaved......
GUN POWDER..........THE MUSKET.....and the mass production thereof.........even then they were freed from their renewed state of catatonia by the moors (Afrasians) - twice enlightened......with their first universities and even running water....even windows at their homes were brought during the dark ages from afar...not to mention bathing.....(lol)
[This message has been edited by AFROCENTRIST32 (edited 28 September 2005).]
"history not only does not have a moral dimension"
For distortionists and eurocentrists......of course not
"Intelligence is understanding the enviorment you live in and dealing with it."
not intelligence is ones ability to think critically and rationally - something many of us don't seem to be able to do.
"Obviously not much of that is going on here. This utopian crap you guys are latching will produce predictible results."
assimilation and degradation of the other cultures of the world at the hand of Europeans is coming to an end - hence the awakening of so many africans to their true past.......
"get an education that results in a more REALISTIC of the world you live it. nobody cares that you are black and have issues with life."
great point..........I'll continue what should have been written next......
Certainly not those openly attack your culture; but more-so those who claim to have your best interests at heart. those who claim to be on your side.... (lol)
The reality is that those of us who know are responsible to relay that information to our youth......even if they don't believe at first.....for it is imperative that we at the very least spark an interest in investigating some of the claims we make...............
THE TRUTH WILL REVEAL IT SELF.
quote:
even then they were freed from their renewed state of catatonia by the moors (Afrasians) - twice enlightened......with their first universities and even running water....even windows at their homes were brought during the dark ages from afar...not to mention bathing.....(lol)
You can also look at as the demise of Africans and the beginning of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. The Moors only preserved Greco-Roman classics and transported Asiatic technology[irrigation[from Persians],Arabic numerals[really from Hindus],lateen sails[was used in the east before the West].
I am willing to bet that without Moorish intervention that Europeans would have never developed the sea power or developed into the Age of Exploration. Sometimes bringing civlization to people is not always the best. The Moors should have stayed in their own countries and developed them.
Prince Henery the Navigator asked the Moors about where their gold came from,and he told them and showed them exactly where it came from.
Most people don't know that Moors[your heroes] were importing slaves from Timbuktu and other Saharan slave routes. Look up the Trans-Saharan slave route[it did not offically end untill 1950's in Libya]
However, what you are glossing over is the Byzantine Empire. Unlike the Northern-Western Europeans, the Byzantines still had thriving schools and recieved technology and ideas from the east.
quote:
Originally posted by ausar:You can also look at as the demise of Africans and the beginning of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. The Moors only preserved Greco-Roman classics and transported Asiatic technology[irrigation[from Persians],Arabic numerals[really from Hindus],lateen sails[was used in the east before the West].
I am willing to bet that without Moorish intervention that Europeans would have never developed the sea power or developed into the Age of Exploration. Sometimes bringing civlization to people is not always the best. The Moors should have stayed in their own countries and developed them.
Prince Henery the Navigator asked the Moors about where their gold came from,and he told them and showed them exactly where it came from.
Most people don't know that Moors[your heroes] were importing slaves from Timbuktu and other Saharan slave routes. Look up the Trans-Saharan slave route[it did not offically end untill 1950's in Libya]
However, what you are glossing over is the Byzantine Empire. Unlike the Northern-Western Europeans, the Byzantines still had thriving schools and recieved technology and ideas from the east.
actually (LOL), the moors are not my heroes for exactly the reasons you mentioned.....I spoke in another thread to the severity of pre-European Arab-chattel slavery to which most of the arabized African moors were subjected. their form of slavery was so severe that infact the africans almost ran into the arms of the europeans (figuratively)...
[This message has been edited by AFROCENTRIST32 (edited 28 September 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by AFROCENTRIST32:
actually the american indian lost for the same reason Africans were enslaved......
GUN POWDER..........THE MUSKET.....and the mass production thereof.........even then they were freed from their renewed state of catatonia by the moors (Afrasians) - twice enlightened......with their first universities and even running water....even windows at their homes were brought during the dark ages from afar...not to mention bathing.....(lol)
Gun powder and related technology-- guns, bombs, cannons, etc. were invented in East Asia, specifically by the Chinese!!
The Chinese had the technology but during the age of European conquest, unfortunately the Chinese goverment was going through a period of economic instability and they so they didn't have the army. Europeans soon stormed them using their own weapons!
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 29 September 2005).]
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:
Gun powder and related technology-- guns, bombs, cannons, etc. were invented in East Asia, specifically the Chinese!!The Chinese had the technology but during the age of European conquest, unfortunately the Chinese goverment was going through a period of economic instability and they didn't so they didn't have the army. Europeans soon stormed them using their own weapons!
agreed
Interesting roots of what became the tool of European imperialism...
Gunpowder:
The Chinese knew gunpowder in the 11th century, but didn’t know the right proportions of getting explosions and didn’t achieve the necessary purification of potassium nitrate. The first Chinese book, which details the explosives proportion, was in 1412 by Huo Lung Ching. [1]
Al-Rammah’s book is the first to explain the purification procedure for potassium nitrate and described many recipes for making gunpowder with the correct proportions to achieve explosion. This is necessary for the development of canons. Partington [ 3] says “the collection of recipes was probably taken from different sources at different times in the author’s family and taken down. Such recipes are described as tested.” Al-Razi, Al-Hamdany, and an Arabic-Syriaque manuscript of the 10th century describe potassium nitrate. Ibn Al-Bitar describes it in 1240. The Arab-Syriaque manuscript of the 10th century gives some recipes of gunpowder. It is assumed that these were added in the 13th century.
The Latin book “Liber Ignium” of Marcus Graecus is originally Arabic (translated in Spain) gives many recipes for making gunpowder the last four of which must have been added to the book in 1280 or 1300. “Did Roger Bacon derive his famous cryptic gunpowder in his Epistola of ca. 1260 from the crusader Peter of Maricourt, some other traveler or from a wide range of reading from Arabic and alchemical books”. References [1], [3], and Joseph Needham, doubt the correctness and effectiveness of the recipe of Bacon.
The German scientist Albert Magnus obtained his information from the “Liber Ignium” originally an Arabic book translated in Spain.
Evidence of the use of gunpowder during the crusades in Fustat, in Egypt, 1168 was found in the form of traces of potassium nitrate. Such traces were also found in 1218 during the siege of Dumyat and in the battle of Al-Mansoura in 1249.
Winter mentions, “the Chinese may have discovered saltpeter (gunpowder) or else that discovery may have been transmitted to them by the Muslims whom they had plenty of opportunities of meeting either at home or abroad. Sarton is referring to Arab-Muslim traders to China, as well as Arab inhabitants in China. As early as 880 an estimated 120,000 Muslims, Jews and Persians liven in Canton alone.”
Canons and Rockets:
There are four Arabic manuscripts (Almakhzoun manuscripts; one in Petersburg, two in Paris and one in Istanbul) in 1320 describing the first portable canon with suitable gunpowder. This description is principally the same as for modern guns. Such canons were used in the famous battle of Ain-Galout against the Mongols (1260).
The Mamlouks developed the canons further during the 14th century.
In Spain, Arabs used canons defending Seville (1248), in Granada 1319, in Baza or Albacete 1324, in Huescar and Martos 1325, in Alicante 1331 and in Algeziras 1342-1344. Partington says, “ the history of artillery in Spain is related to that of the Arabs”.
J.R. Partington mentions, “Arabic accounts suggest that the Arabs introduced firearms into Spain, from where they passed to Italy, from there to France, and finally Germany.”
“The Arabs, in any event, appear to have been the first to inherit (and possibly) originate the secret of the rocket, and it was through Arabic writings, rather than the Mongols -- that the Europeans came to know the rocket. The two notable examples of Arabic knowledge of the rocket are the so-called “self-moving and combusting egg” of the Syrian Al-Hassan Al-Rammah (d. 1294 - 1295), details of which may be found in Willey Ley’s popular “Rockets, Missiles, and Space Travel” and physician Yusuf ibn Ismail Al-Kutub’s description (1311) of the saltpeter (“they use it to make a fire which rises and moves, thus increasing it in lightness and inflammability”). - Frank H. Winter
Sources: Courtesy of FSTC
First posted here: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001869.html
A good link by the way, which exposes the so-called European "Dark Ages" myths. 
quote:
Gun powder and related technology-- guns, bombs, cannons, etc. were invented in East Asia, specifically the Chinese!!The Chinese had the technology but during the age of European conquest, unfortunately the Chinese goverment was going through a period of economic instability and they didn't so they didn't have the army. Europeans soon stormed them using their own weapons!
That's not the only innovation that the Chinese introduced. Don't forget the first moveable type[found in Korea],paper currency,and deep oil drilling. Military innovartions like the striup came from either the nomadic Mongols or Chinese.
Windmills can either from ancient India or Persia[Moors brought this to Europe].
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
They have literally created the modern world we live in today. You cannot spin it anyother way.
The first 'modern' European nations were in the Iberian peninsula; without Moorish, Arab, Indian, and Chinese knowledge, they would have gone nowehre. Besides civilization can't develop in a vacuum, the nations of the 1500 centuries were blessed by the civilization of the past. Many of these civilizations can be found in Africa.
1. The Western civlization is a very late group of civilization. Ancient Greece shouldn't even be included; they were heavily influenced by West Asia and Africa. Ancient Greece should be a part of the Eastern part of the world; just like Armenia.
2. Germanic peoples of Europe were originally considered barbarians.
3. Without the wheel, there would be no car at all.
West, nanely Germany, Great Britain, Western Europe and the US rose not only, because of the whites but also other races. Whether they were inventors, labourers, or slaves does not matter. Just take a closer look at the list of colour inventors, scholars, etc who have greatly contributed to the Western civilization.
quote:
Originally posted by AFROCENTRIST32
actually the american indian lost for the same reason Africans were enslaved.GUN POWDER..........THE MUSKET.....and the mass production thereof.........
This thread needs more exposure
quote:What exactly is the idiotic accusation about the 5 dollar pretentians?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Idiotic accusation
quote:If I know any? Yep, I have been to the Amazon and more.... Now what?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Indeed I know Native Americans mainly in USA, Mexico and Brazil, and I have for many years. Do you know any, have you ever participated in any action for Native rights? Are you member of any organisation for the support of Native Americans?
quote:How is that possible when I am addressing "racial injustices", while you are making excuses? That was more illogical diarrhea babble you spewed there.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Seems you have even lower EQ. If we now shall discuss each others eventual EQ. You seem unable to understand how some Native Americans view cultural appropriation.
quote:What is a Black peoples perspective? I have been calling out 5 dollar pretentians, is that a Black peoples perspective?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
You seem only interested in Black peoples perspective.
quote:I am not surprised about your position calling it spam, considering it debunked he hell out of you left and right. A man stands on his square and admits defeat, which is the more likely think to do. This tells something about you. Bitchmade?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
The rest of your post is mostly spam bringing up a lot of things irrelevant for the discussion. Seems you are just out to have a quarrel.
quote:Why would I be jealous that some Native Americans got a very small compensation for some of the land loss and suffering they had to endure? I don't even live in the States, not am I a Black American. By that logic this made nonsense: (Jealousy is a bitch.).
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Are you jealous that some Native Americans got a very small compensation for some of the land loss and suffering they had to endure? Jealousy is a bitch.
quote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/taxnotes/2022/03/01/state-tax-authority-and-native-americans-complex-and-convoluted/
By law, Native American tribes, their members, their lands, and their profits are exempt from state taxation without express authorization from Congress.
quote:https://www.iwgia.org/en/usa/4253-iw-2021-usa.html
The number of Indigenous people in the United States of America is estimated at between 2.5 and 6 million,1 of which around 20% live in American Indian areas or Alaska Native villages. Indigenous Peoples in the United States are more commonly referred to as Native groups. The state with the largest Native population is California; the place with the largest Native population is New York City.
quote:https://mwmblog.com/2021/07/25/the-dawes-act-and-the-origin-of-the-term-5-indian/
There is no official estimate of how many $5 Indians enrolled. The Dawes Rolls remain a murky and inaccurate snapshot of Native American citizenship. In the 2000 Census, the number of people claiming Cherokee ancestry was 3 times that of the official tribe enrollment.
quote:Are you saying these white scholars / professors primary scholarly work on cranial metrical data was false or true?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Well, I bring it up also with those Black people that uphold and promote outdated ideas about Black Olmecs or other Black/African peoples in precolumbian America. You will be hard pressed to find experts on precolumbian cultures promoting such ideas today. Ask an expert like Ann Cyphers if you do not believe me.
quote:I am not this invested in this subject outside of this I am more focused on other things like Computer technology. But by your argument there seem to be a consensus on the precolumbian Native American cultures?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
How many archaeologists, anthropologists, geneticists and others specializing in precolumbian Native American cultures do you know?
quote:https://aaregistry.org/story/the-arawak-community-a-brief-story/
The Arawak community is celebrated on this date in 1500. They are a non-white community of indigenous peoples of South America and the Caribbean.
Specifically, the term "Arawak" has been applied at various times to the Lokono of South America and the Taíno, who historically lived in the Greater Antilles and the northern Lesser Antilles in the Caribbean. All these groups spoke related Arawakan languages. The term Arawak originally was applied by white Europeans specifically to the South American community who self-identified as Arawak, Arhuaco, or Lokono. Their Arawak language is the name of the overall Arawakan language family. Arawakan speakers in the Caribbean were also historically known as the Taíno, a term meaning “relative”.
[...]
The Arawakan languages may have emerged in the Orinoco River valley. They subsequently spread widely, becoming by far the most extensive language family in South America at the time of white-European contact, with speakers located in various areas along the Orinoco and Amazonian rivers and their tributaries. The group that self-identified as the Arawak, also known as the Lokono, settled the coastal areas of what is now Guyana, Suriname, Grenada, Jamaica, and parts of the islands of Trinidad and Tobago. The Spaniards who arrived in the Americas in 1492, and later in Puerto Rico, did not bring women on their first expeditions.
[...]
In the 21st century, these descendants, about 10,000 Lokono, live primarily in the coastal areas of Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana, with additional Lokono living throughout the larger region. Unlike many indigenous groups in South America, the Lokono population is growing.
quote:https://thegeneticgenealogist.com/2008/03/17/the-six-founding-native-american-mothers/
“All Native American mtDNA can be traced back to five Haplogroups called A, B, C, D, and X. More specifically, Native American mtDNA belongs to sub-haplogroups that are unique to the Americas and not found in Asia or Europe: A2, B2, C1, D1, and X2a (with minor groups C4c, D2, D3, and D4h3)”
quote:https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.320.5880.1146b
Ancient DNA From Frozen Hair May Untangle Eskimo Roots
quote:Taino and African maternal heritage in the Greater Antilles
Notwithstanding the general interest and the geopolitical importance of the island countries in the Greater Antilles, little is known about the specific ancestral Native American and African populations that settled them.
In an effort to alleviate this lacuna of information on the genetic constituents of the Greater Antilles, we comprehensively compared the mtDNA compositions of Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica and Puerto Rico.
To accomplish this, the mtDNA HVRI and HVRII regions, as well as coding diagnostic sites, were assessed in the Haitian general population and compared to data from reference populations.
The Taino maternal DNA is prominent in the ex-Spanish colonies (61.3%–22.0%) while it is basically non-existent in the ex-French and ex-English colonies of Haiti (0.0%) and Jamaica (0.5%), respectively. The most abundant Native American mtDNA haplogroups in the Greater Antilles are A2, B2 and C1. The African mtDNA component is almost fixed in Haiti (98.2%) and Jamaica (98.5%), and the frequencies of specific African haplogroups vary considerably among the five island nations.
The strong persistence of Taino mtDNA in the ex-Spanish colonies (and especially in Puerto Rico), and its absence in the French and English excolonies is likely the result of different social norms regarding mixed marriages with Taino women during the early years after the first contact with Europeans. In addition, this article reports on the results of an integrative approach based on mtDNA analysis and demographic data that tests the hypothesis of a southward shift in raiding zones along the African west coast during the period encompassing the Transatlantic Slave Trade.
quote:(Derek C. Johnson et al., Mitochondrial DNA. 2015 Jun; 26(3): 445–451., Mitochondrial DNA diversity in the African American population)
“Thirteen of the 18 haplogroups previously observed in African populations were observed in the African American populations: L1a, L1b, L1c, L2a, L2b, L2c, L3b, L3d, L3e1, L3e2, L3e3, L3e4, and L3f”
quote:(Eugenia D’Atanasio et al., Y Haplogroup Diversity of the Dominican Republic: Reconstructing the Effect of the European Colonization and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trades)
“In this context, the Dominican Republic is in line with the observations from other Caribbean and non-Caribbean American regions. All the mtDNA African lineages account for 61% of the maternal haplogroups, with the most frequent mtDNA lineages being the sub-Saharan L1c, L2a, L3b, and L3d, all reaching frequencies higher than 10%.
Y Haplogroup Diversity of the Dominican Republic: Reconstructing the Effect of the European Colonization and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trades”
quote:Your string of melanophobic posting behavior prove otherwise and seems a typical parallel of the below Swedish MO. You've not said one positive thing about Blacks or blacks and chafe when confronted about it by attempting to excuse your anti-Black rants.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
years.
I do not hate Black people,
quote:You are confused over 5 dollar pretendians you know. Those aren't Indians, do you understand that?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
The idiotic accusation I talked about was your claim that I do not know any native Americans but only sit and make up stuff. You do not know which people I know, or anything about my personal experiences.
quote:https://www.archives.gov/research/native-americans/dawes/tutorial/intro.html
The Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes was appointed by President Grover Cleveland in 1893 to negotiate land with the Cherokee.
Will Rogers and his wife, 1935.
Will's application to the Dawes Commission in 1900 was accepted, and he was enrolled as a member of the Cherokee Nation.
quote:The point was that these are not indigenous to the Americas, but separate. Are trull this dumb, you don't understand this? Good lord, you are dumb as hell.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
None of the articles you link to prove any African presence in precolumbian Americas (if it is what you wanted to say by posting them). They just show that people have mixed and interacted, and that Natives have been displaced, or diminished in numbers, in certain places.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:The point of my post was to say that there's not genetic similarity. What part of this do you not understand? Has Black hatred you blinded so deep you count grasp this?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
DNA shows that Olmecs were Native Americans. Anne Cyphers actually states that there has not been any evidence of any African presence during Olmec times. If you would visit some conferences with people studying precolumbian cultures you would find that the majority will agree with her that there is so far no tangible evidence of an African presence. Post contact is another thing since people have mixed and interacted for about 500 years.
quote:This question comes from someone who defends 5 dollar Indians. That's comical.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Do you hate Native Americans?
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
quote:As I said before, these few "Black people" got this information from WHITE SCHOLARS.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
What is it really that bothers you about me addressing the issue of some Black people who distort Native American history? What is it to you? You said yourself that you are not even African American.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote:https://www.rit.edu/liberalarts/news/navajo-recording-artist-speak-perform-rit
Navajo Radmilla Cody,
Cody is a traditional Navajo recording artist, Indie Award winner, Native American Award nominee, Miss Navajo Nation (1997)
quote:Some individuals on social media making unsubstantiated claims, are indeed unimportant.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
You seem to think it is rather unimportant. Then one can ask If the issue is not important how come that people spend time addressing it? Why do Native Americans and also some African Americans, Latinos and White people go through the trouble of writing books, articles, making videos and debating on social media if it is a question without importance?
quote:Because Black Americans history was mudded and confused by white scholars and the government. This was explained not just by me, but by others on here as well.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Why did people react so strongly over an Olmec head in a mural on African American history? There was even a petition online to try to make the artists remove the Olmec head.
quote:I have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you should ask New Mexico university this question?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Why would some people protest against that New Mexico university arranged trips for students to Mexico, to try to find African influence among the Olmec heads? Why would anyone protest if they did not find it important?
quote:Because it's a myth?
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Why would at least two academics with Native background write a letter to an academic journal asking them to retract an article who promoted the Black Olmec myth? Why would they care if they did not think it was an important question?
quote:It's obvious this person has issues with Black people, especially Black Americans and is trying to hide it by supposedly supporting Native Americans. However, when 5 dollar pretendians are being brought up, this individual is nowhere to do found.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote:Your string of melanophobic posting behavior prove otherwise and seems a typical parallel of the below Swedish MO. You've not said one positive thing about Blacks or blacks and chafe when confronted about it by attempting to excuse your anti-Black rants.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
years.
I do not hate Black people,
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The Local Sweden's news in English
H&M
H&M suspends staff who used racial slur << ‘Nigga Lab Beanie (link)’ >> as product name
Swedish clothing giant Hennes and Mauritz (HM) said on Thursday it had [only] suspended a team at one of its subsidiaries for using a racist slur in an internal product name.
Published: 7 August 2020 07:47 CEST
The product, a beanie hat, was being developed for the H&M-controlled “& Other Stories” fashion chain, which has 70 stores in Europe, the United States and Asia.
“We take the use of racially offensive language extremely seriously. While internal and external investigations are taking place, we have suspended the team and managers responsible for this area of the business,” H&M spokeswoman Ulrika Isaksson said in a statement to AFP.
The product team had used a racist slur in the name for the hat internally, and it had not gone on sale to the public, according to H&M.
Like other companies, the Swedish retail group has been emphasising its anti-racism credentials in response to Black Lives Matter protests, since the killing by police of unarmed black American George Floyd in May.
But it has been accused of racial insensitivity in the past.
But it has been accused of racial insensitivity in the past.
In 2018, the company featured an advertisement of a black boy sporting a hoodie with the words “Coolest monkey in the jungle” written on it.
[Only a]fter a backlash, H&M issued an apology and withdrew the hoodie from sale. Isaksson said the company was making a number of commitments to “improve the diversity of our teams”, and strengthening “internal controls” on images and texts.
* H&M removes ad over racism accusations
“We have already run training on conscious and unconscious bias for thousands of people across the company. As part of our global inclusion and diversity strategy, this will now become mandatory for everyone,” she said.
quote:People rage about Afrocentricism and for some good reasons. But Eurocentricism in Academia is more dangerous.
Originally posted by Swenet:
This nice summary discussing the many Eurocentrisms of academia needs a good bump every once in a while. (Especially with the dumb provocation thread that just got created about light skin color reconstructed from Abusir genomes [which has already been posted before and which, even if true, is supposed to prove what, exactly?]).
As Martin Bernal pointed out, it can't be overstated the extent to which these 'scientific' institutions are betraying ancient proto-anthro texts and are hostile to Africans (and minorities in general), as Greek and biblical texts putting Egyptians with tropical populations, or the ancient global south, or whatever you want to call it, in terms of dark skin, have been part of the collective memory of white intellectual institutions since the Middle Ages.
. quote:The cracks are definitely showing but is it enough?
Originally posted by Swenet:
^The thing with these scientific institutions is that the technological hegemony of western civilization and its concrete and tangible effects in people's lives (e.g. the potential to raise nations out of poverty, prolong lifespans, cure illnesses, bring social mobility, etc), is drowning out all the ongoing aggressions by these institutions. After all, if you're living in a western country, use western technology (smartphones, etc.), have made capitalism work for you, have invested in western education for more than a decade, what is all the above in the OP going to mean to you? It's going to feel like it's history/in the past.
Thankfully this clean image is now beginning to show cracks as people are becoming more aware of the massive looting of antiquities and other illegal and unethical activities by 'scientific' and educational institutions that are too flagrant, blatantly disrespectful and shocking to put aside as 'done history'.
quote:If anything Afrocentricism(or hoteps) gets clowned/made of by other Black people in the Black community. Yet, non-Black Americans(mainly the non-Black ones) think its some huge force in the Black community.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Aside from the bias, I personally believe there is some politics involved. Take it as an anecdote as I can't say anything about it now. But we've likely arrived past a tipping point in which it'd take decades to fix. The Cleopatra thing was pretty much the nail in the coffin as far as public perception goes. And there's a certain idea being pushed to where North West Africans and East Africans will become residual. Afrocentrism takes a lot of public heat but as far as influence goes it's merely a niche. I can't fully explain how the criticisms became more influential than the "movement" but that where we are.
quote:I remember in college in one of my elective classes which was Forensic Science, our professor taught us that no one is 100% "objective" not even scientist.
Originally posted by Swenet:
^The public thinks scientific and educational institutions can do no wrong (white is right, especially if it's wearing a white lab coat). I've already given up hope and have already moved on from academia, so when the scandals came to light recently (e.g. Douglas Latchford, etc), I thought it was positive, but I thought the same thing you're saying. It is what it is.
quote:
Originally posted by Askia_The_Great:
quote:If anything Afrocentricism(or hoteps) gets clowned/made of by other Black people in the Black community. Yet, non-Black Americans(mainly the non-Black ones) think its some huge force in the Black community.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Aside from the bias, I personally believe there is some politics involved. Take it as an anecdote as I can't say anything about it now. But we've likely arrived past a tipping point in which it'd take decades to fix. The Cleopatra thing was pretty much the nail in the coffin as far as public perception goes. And there's a certain idea being pushed to where North West Africans and East Africans will become residual. Afrocentrism takes a lot of public heat but as far as influence goes it's merely a niche. I can't fully explain how the criticisms became more influential than the "movement" but that where we are.
Yea you'll have some Black Americans who will be like, "mAn... eGyPt iS iN aFrIkA! hOw cAnT tHe aNciEnTs bE bLaCk!?" but outside of that most keep it moving and don't even care about the deep stuff most Afrocentrics talk about.
quote:Partly this has to be because the US in general has such a big cultural imprint on the rest of the world. People all over the globe are more familiar with our stuff than they are any other country's, so African-Americans probably have more media visibility than any other Black ethnic group. Though, yes, I have seen some Black immigrant people in the US look down upon native-born "ADOS" Black people.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Esp. here on ES, 99% of the experience of the black Diaspora is centered obsessivly on AAs, esp. by non AA, non Black posters. AAs are the low hanging fruit of the Diaspora, so it makes sense, We Wuz Kangs and Hoteps is just making fun of AAVE...after all.
quote:
Originally posted by BrandonP:
quote:Partly this has to be because the US in general has such a big cultural imprint on the rest of the world. People all over the globe are more familiar with our stuff than they are any other country's, so African-Americans probably have more media visibility than any other Black ethnic group. Though, yes, I have seen some Black immigrant people in the US look down upon native-born "ADOS" Black people.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Esp. here on ES, 99% of the experience of the black Diaspora is centered obsessivly on AAs, esp. by non AA, non Black posters. AAs are the low hanging fruit of the Diaspora, so it makes sense, We Wuz Kangs and Hoteps is just making fun of AAVE...after all.
quote:
Originally posted by Askia_The_Great:
quote:If anything Afrocentricism(or hoteps) gets clowned/made of by other Black people in the Black community. Yet, non-Black Americans(mainly the non-Black ones) think its some huge force in the Black community.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Aside from the bias, I personally believe there is some politics involved. Take it as an anecdote as I can't say anything about it now. But we've likely arrived past a tipping point in which it'd take decades to fix. The Cleopatra thing was pretty much the nail in the coffin as far as public perception goes. And there's a certain idea being pushed to where North West Africans and East Africans will become residual. Afrocentrism takes a lot of public heat but as far as influence goes it's merely a niche. I can't fully explain how the criticisms became more influential than the "movement" but that where we are.
Yea you'll have some Black Americans who will be like, "mAn... eGyPt iS iN aFrIkA! hOw cAnT tHe aNciEnTs bE bLaCk!?" but outside of that most keep it moving and don't even care about the deep stuff most Afrocentrics talk about.
quote:I mean it is what it is. Afrocentrics are a non-factor tbh. Yea I understand that some North Africans see they have to defend their history in what they believe are "culture vultures" but at the end of the day Afrocentrics never had a platform to begin with. Unless you believe a few blogs, books, YouTube videos, etc are a deal breaker.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Honestly the Afrocentrics are getting what comes to them, folks like Keita were warning fools 10 yrs ago, and they did'nt listen. Obsession with Historical figures and cultures simply because they involve Europeans or Western Culture has always been the achilles heel of Afrocentrism.
The Moors, Hebrews, and even black Olmecs etc. Slop plain and simple...
Granted I doubt the producer of the "Black Cleopatra" documantary was Afrocentric but really a black Cleopatra...smh. Just plain Sloppy and trivial.
The Kandace Queens of Merowe did way more for African people than Cleo did but because Cleo is Greek, clowns obsess over her.
quote:The issue goes far beyond a few YouTube videos. I have previously discussed this phenomenon in a thread (that got closed for no reason) , highlighting the recurring instances where North African characters in video games and movies are portrayed by black actors. Moreover, certain museums and universities have been granting platforms to Afrocentrist individuals, allowing them to hold exhibitions and conferences. An example of this is the rapper Akala, who has been given opportunities to present his Afrocentric views in Oxford : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUtAxUQjwB4&t=1s&pp=ygULYWthbGEgZWd5cHQ%3D (3.4 million views...)
Originally posted by Askia_The_Great:
quote:I mean it is what it is. Afrocentrics are a non-factor tbh. Yea I understand that some North Africans see they have to defend their history in what they believe are "culture vultures" but at the end of the day Afrocentrics never had a platform to begin with. Unless you believe a few blogs, books, YouTube videos, etc are a deal breaker.
Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Honestly the Afrocentrics are getting what comes to them, folks like Keita were warning fools 10 yrs ago, and they did'nt listen. Obsession with Historical figures and cultures simply because they involve Europeans or Western Culture has always been the achilles heel of Afrocentrism.
The Moors, Hebrews, and even black Olmecs etc. Slop plain and simple...
Granted I doubt the producer of the "Black Cleopatra" documantary was Afrocentric but really a black Cleopatra...smh. Just plain Sloppy and trivial.
The Kandace Queens of Merowe did way more for African people than Cleo did but because Cleo is Greek, clowns obsess over her.
quote:antalas listen every dark skin population is Black, you do not have to look like Africans to be Black.
Originally posted by Antalas:
^The population in question belongs to the Paleolithic/Mesolithic era. Notably, light skin has been present in North Africa since at least the middle of the 6th millennium BC, and this characteristic was introduced by the early European farmers.
Furthermore, it's important to clarify that the term "dark skin" does not imply any genetic or craniometric similarity to black Africans. In contemporary times, there are numerous dark-skinned populations that differ significantly in appearance from black Africans, and this was even more pronounced in the past.
quote:Gabriel Camps, Les berbères, p. 79
We thus come to the conclusion that black populations have always inhabited the Sahara but gradually came under the dominance of the Paleoberber people: the Equidians, Garamantes, Gaetulians, and later the Tuaregs, and in the northern Sahara, the Arabs and Arabo-Berbers. The Saharan melanoderms from prehistory did not disappear entirely. It is certain that their descendants, known as the Haratin (referred to as Izzagaren in Tamahaq, meaning 'the Reds'), cannot have retained faithfully the characteristics, which are, in any case, diverse and imprecise, of the Ethiopians. It is evident that they have, over the centuries, experienced numerous influences from Sudanese origins, which are genuinely negroid. If we are to identify the present-day human groups that most likely preserved the characteristics of these ancient Ethiopians, we must turn our attention to the Tubus and the Fulani (Peuls).
quote:Uhhh... No.
Originally posted by KING:
quote:antalas listen every dark skin population is Black, you do not have to look like Africans to be Black.
Originally posted by Antalas:
^The population in question belongs to the Paleolithic/Mesolithic era. Notably, light skin has been present in North Africa since at least the middle of the 6th millennium BC, and this characteristic was introduced by the early European farmers.
Furthermore, it's important to clarify that the term "dark skin" does not imply any genetic or craniometric similarity to black Africans. In contemporary times, there are numerous dark-skinned populations that differ significantly in appearance from black Africans, and this was even more pronounced in the past.
quote:Excuse me, but skin color is what makes you Black. Don't try to support antalas.
Originally posted by Askia_The_Great:
quote:Uhhh... No.
Originally posted by KING:
quote:antalas listen every dark skin population is Black, you do not have to look like Africans to be Black.
Originally posted by Antalas:
^The population in question belongs to the Paleolithic/Mesolithic era. Notably, light skin has been present in North Africa since at least the middle of the 6th millennium BC, and this characteristic was introduced by the early European farmers.
Furthermore, it's important to clarify that the term "dark skin" does not imply any genetic or craniometric similarity to black Africans. In contemporary times, there are numerous dark-skinned populations that differ significantly in appearance from black Africans, and this was even more pronounced in the past.
quote:How do you think those ancient African aDNA samples would get modeled without the Natufians or Neolithic Levantines being sequenced? I have a feeling the Eurocentrics would have still tried to Eurasianize their ancestry as much as they could.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Has anyone in this space ever wondered what would have been the case if any of the African samples with Northeast African or Egyptian related ancestry were sequenced and published before the Raqefet Natufian were?
Let me note with a degree of certainty that if:(
the Pastoral Neolithic Samples, Taforalt, IAM or Oub02, Skhirat, The ancient Swahili, Kulubnarti and christian Nubian samples, or even Abusir el Meleq.) ..any of these samples were published before the Natufian, a lot would have been different in these spaces.
quote:You then say: "the black north africans in question were not berbers..." yet there is ample historical evidence acknoweldging that this was in fact the case.
We thus come to the conclusion that black populations have always inhabited the Sahara but gradually came under the dominance of the Paleoberber people: the Equidians, Garamantes, Gaetulians, and later the Tuaregs, and in the northern Sahara, the Arabs and Arabo-Berbers.
quote:
"The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free inhabitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro Asiatics, such as the Lascars."
"The Negro Law of South Carolina" by John Belton O'Neall, page 5 (1848) J.G. Bowman
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Negro_Law_of_South_Carolina.html?id=r9lBAAAAIAAJ
quote:Everything else you said is a strawman (as usual). I said what I said, and I didn't say what I didn't say. I said nothing about west or central africa.
In 1848 O'Neall (who was reported by a personal acquaintance to have owned "about 150" slaves and to have been "a most humane master")[3] wrote a digest of the negro law of South Carolina, which he read to the State Agricultural Society. The Society directed him to submit the document to the governor, with a request that he would lay it before the legislature, at its approaching session in November 1848.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Belton_O%27Neall
quote:Well. I can't say that they wouldn't but it would be a bit harder to do so. Especially to the extent they do now. With the Natufian genome came a shift in how people viewed anthropology. "...no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians" (Lazaridis, et al. 2016) That paper created a hard line separating African (whether north or below the Sahara) and Near eastern Ancestry. It was an untrue assessment which was only countered or addressed twice in academia. Once by Daniel Shriner and then by Lazaridis in paper making another critical assumption. The former gets no recognition and the latter is stuck in preprint for over a half a decade. I believe that the estimates of Eurasian DNA in samples such as Taforalt would be lowered by default and failure in forming 2-3 way models with any Eur+Afr combination would have prompted everyone to see that region as either an outlier or a progenitor for later populations in Africa and the middle east. Same with the pastoral neolithic. With combination of uniparental and physical data, more of their ancestry would have been looked at as African because that intellectual bias; the hardline which was created by the Natufian paper would not exist. A lot of the issues in genetic anthropology relating to Africans is downstream. From G25/Vahaduo to Schuenemen and the Abusir mummy interpretation.
Originally posted by BrandonP:
To address something Elmaestro posted earlier:
quote:How do you think those ancient African aDNA samples would get modeled without the Natufians or Neolithic Levantines being sequenced? I have a feeling the Eurocentrics would have still tried to Eurasianize their ancestry as much as they could.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Has anyone in this space ever wondered what would have been the case if any of the African samples with Northeast African or Egyptian related ancestry were sequenced and published before the Raqefet Natufian were?
Let me note with a degree of certainty that if:(
the Pastoral Neolithic Samples, Taforalt, IAM or Oub02, Skhirat, The ancient Swahili, Kulubnarti and christian Nubian samples, or even Abusir el Meleq.) ..any of these samples were published before the Natufian, a lot would have been different in these spaces.
quote:I agree that the samples currently available can affect how data gets interpreted, and it certainly seems that the aDNA fandom has a tendency to interpret models literally (e.g. various statements I've seen that ancient Nubians had to have been half Natufian and half East African or Dinka simply because some Sudanese aDNA gets modeled that way). It's not unlike how some Afrocentrics took the DNA Tribes reports on Egyptian royal mummies to literally mean that ancient Egyptians were most closely related to peoples of the African Great Lakes.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Well. I can't say that they wouldn't but it would be a bit harder to do so. Especially to the extent they do now. With the Natufian genome came a shift in how people viewed anthropology. "...no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians" (Lazaridis, et al. 2016) That paper created a hard line separating African (whether north or below the Sahara) and Near eastern Ancestry. It was an untrue assessment which was only countered or addressed twice in academia. Once by Daniel Shriner and then by Lazaridis in paper making another critical assumption. The former gets no recognition and the latter is stuck in preprint for over a half a decade. I believe that the estimates of Eurasian DNA in samples such as Taforalt would be lowered by default and failure in forming 2-3 way models with any Eur+Afr combination would have prompted everyone to see that region as either an outlier or a progenitor for later populations in Africa and the middle east. Same with the pastoral neolithic. With combination of uniparental and physical data, more of their ancestry would have been looked at as African because that intellectual bias; the hardline which was created by the Natufian paper would not exist. A lot of the issues in genetic anthropology relating to Africans is downstream. From G25/Vahaduo to Schuenemen and the Abusir mummy interpretation.
quote:Whomp whomp whomp, omg do you ever stop crying about these Afrocentric boogeymen? Nobody cares about wanting to be North African. No one in the African diaspora or on the continent itself claims to be north African, so what are you whining about?
Originally posted by Antalas:
I strongly disagree with the "it's a minority" "we make fun of them." This is a false impression simply because most people of African descent in the diaspora may not initially show a strong interest in history. However, upon discussing the topic, you'll find that many of them do indeed hold Afrocentric beliefs and theories. Even within the academic field, several black scholars demonstrate clear biases, like SOY Keita or that clown of "Molefi Asante," of whom I recently read an article where he suggests that Septimius Severus was black solely because he hailed from Africa. I couldn't believe this was actually published...
Furthermore, I was surprised to learn about the existence of black academies in the US, where the majority of students and teachers are black. Of course and no surprise these institutions tend to teach Afrocentric theories when it comes to history.
In my personal experience, particularly online, I've encountered very few black individuals who were not proponents of Afrocentrism. Additionally, in real life, there's a persistent belief among some SSAs that North Africans are seen as Arab invaders. However, I won't blame them because that's how most North Africans identify and how they are viewed by Europeans.
quote:https://archaeologybulletin.org/articles/10.5334/bha.20103
Petrie's association with both of these men, and the exchange of ideas, materials and theories among them, was influential on his own practical and theoretical work on civilization, race, and culture. It was also important for the research Galton and Pearson were doing, since Petrie supplied them with needed human data and aided them in their statistical analyses. A brief examination of some of the anthropometric research published by the Eugenic Laboratories at UCL reveal that the faculty depended heavily upon Petrie to supply raw data in the form of human remains. It also establishes Petrie as a reliable source of statistical information and eugenic conclusions. Furthermore, the historical analysis of the development of civilization in Petrie's own works, such as Janus in Modern Life (1907) and The Revolutions of Civilisation (1911), demonstrate his adherence to a social evolutionary framework.[11] Petrie's social ideas were formed, not only by well-known works such as Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859), but also, and even more so, by the statistical analysis and eugenic conclusions drawn from the anthropometric data he gathered with Galton and Pearson.[12] Like other social scientists at the time he presented and supported the evolutionary framework; he then went a step further by encouraging individuals to participate in social change through artificial selection, by choosing better mates.
quote:https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/african-studies-review/article/abs/herskovitsmustfall-a-meditation-on-whiteness-african-studies-and-the-unfinished-business-of-1968/160E96A9 86A2A6C23F86BE73E9277DA9
Why is African Studies in North America dominated by white scholars? In this reflection piece, the 2018 president of the African Studies Association revisits the organization’s sixty-year history, exposing the processes by which white privilege was hardwired into African Studies at the organization’s founding in 1957 and then secured first by the displacement of the much older tradition of African American scholarship on Africa and second by the “recolonization American-style” of knowledge production on the continent in the postcolonial era.
quote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Studies_Association
The African Studies Association (ASA) is a US-based association of scholars, students, practitioners, and institutions with an interest in the continent of Africa. Founded in 1957, the ASA is the leading organization of African Studies in North America, with a global membership of approximately 2000. The association's headquarters are at Rutgers University in New Jersey. The ASA holds annual conferences and virtual events for its members year-round.
As a result of racial and political disputes over exclusion from leadership positions of black academics and ASA leaders' ties with the US intelligence and military in the mid-twentieth century, the ASA split in 1968, when the Black Caucus of the ASA, led by John Henrik Clarke, founded the African Heritage Studies Association (AHSA).
The ASA is different from the African Studies Association of Africa (ASAA), which was founded at the University of Cape Town in October 1-2, 2012.
quote:https://www.historytoday.com/archive/feature/tutankhamun-flesh
The summer of 1923 gave newspaper readers a break from the press circus surrounding the tomb of Tutankhamun, the discovery of which just a few months earlier had grabbed the world’s attention. But an anonymous editorial in the Harlem-based weekly Negro World was suspicious of the sudden lull in what had been near constant coverage. The archaeologists must have clammed up for a reason, the editorial surmised, and that reason could only be race. If Tutankhamun proved to have skin the colour of ‘unbleached coal’, public interest would disappear, for ‘white Americans call nothing creditable Negroid if they can possibly find another name for it’.
quote:https://archive.org/details/cyclopediauniver197274ridp/page/n47/mode/2up
In the present work the color of the human body has been taken as the most invariable criterion of race character, and on that fundamental fact, assisted by other physical traits and by intellectual peculiarities of development, particularly by the great fact of language, the classification has been made. This has been done on the hypothesis of the general unity of mankind and the derivation of all the races from some common source localized in time and place. The character and method of classification chosen as the basis of the present treatise on the races of mankind will sufficiently appear in the chapter devoted to that topic.
...
We shall begin with that which is clearly the most important division of mankind; that is, the Ruddy or White, Races. We shall see, first of all, the great Aryan Family parting from its central locality in Western Asia into its Eastern, or Asiatic, and its Western, or European, stem. These we shall endeavor to follow, considering in turn the ancient and modern Iranic races, and afterwards the Indie Aryans, from the time of their establishment in the Indus valley to their modern developments in the powerful races of Hindustan . Then in order we shall follow the Western division of the Indo-European family, noting its emergence in the Hellenic, the Italican, the Celtic, and the Teutonic races. This department of the work will bring tis into contact with the great classical nations of the ancient world. Since it includes essentially all the peoples of Europe, we shall here find those races in whom history has the most abiding interest. We must needs dwell long with the great Greeks, the Romans, the Celts, the Germans, and their descendent races in Europe and the West.
The important Aryan family, however, is by no means coextensive with the White, or Ruddy, races of mankind. Of these te next general division is the Semitic family, second only in fame to the Indo-Europeans. We shall in proper order take up the ancient Semites and follow them from their earliest ethnic life in the valley of the Euphrates, through the great Aramaic and Hebraic developments, down to the modern Arabic evolution in Southwestern Asia. Afterwards the Hamites, of still narrower activities and race dispersion, will be considered, thus completing the cycle of the Ruddy division of mankind.
quote:Max Dashu
Maxine Hammond Dashu (born 1950), known professionally as Max Dashu, is an American feminist historian, author, and artist. Her areas of expertise include female iconography, mother-right cultures and the origins of patriarchy. She identifies as a lesbian.
In 1970, Dashu founded the Suppressed Histories Archives to research and document women's history and to make the full spectrum of women's history and culture visible and accessible. The collection includes 15,000 slides and 30,000 digital images. Since the early 1970s, Dashu has delivered visual presentations on women's history throughout North America, Europe and Australia.
Dashu is the author of Witches and Pagans: Women in European Folk Religion, 700–1100 (2016), the first volume of a planned 16-volume series called Secret History of the Witches.
quote:You've been on here crying all the time.
Originally posted by Antalas:
Seems like Djehuti already had a victim mentality back in 2005 ! It is amusing to witness his continuous efforts to depict the present Academic field as a racially exclusive club reminiscent of the early 20th century. However, this is merely a desperate and insincere endeavor to validate his afrocentrist perspectives, while simultaneously suggesting the existence of an obscure and covert academic elite conspiring to inferiorize Africans. Meanwhile the truth is that they either tend to remain neutral or are politically correct due to their white guilt.
quote:(Villamar Becerril Enrique, "DNA Studies and the Origin of the Olmecs", Mexican Archeology, no. 150, pp. 40-41.)
“The pioneering study of ADNMT carried out on Olmec individuals, one from San Lorenzo and the other from Loma del Zapote, resulted,
in both cases, in the unequivocal presence of the distinctive mutations of the “A” maternal lineage.
That is, the origin of the Olmecs is not in Africa but in America, since they share the most abundant of the five mitochondrial haplogroups characteristic of the indigenous populations of our continent: A, B, C, D and X.
Beyond what happened in other latitudes, immersed in their particular environmental mosaic from which they took advantage, the Mesoamerican peoples resolved in a practical and innovative way multiple challenges of their day to day. This led them to forge such diverse societies, whose achievements in countless areas of human endeavor made Mesoamerica an extraordinary cultural area of the ancient world. The underlying talent and its bearers were of local descent, and an example of this is Olmec society, the first Mesoamerican civilization.
Enrique Villamar Becerril. Physical anthropologist from ENAH. Candidate for a doctor in Mesoamerican studies (UNAM), with an analysis of ADNMT in bone remains from various sites of the Preclassic period.”
quote:(Lance D. Green, James N. Derr and Alec Knight - mtDNA Affinities of the Peoples of North-Central Mexico)
“mtDNA haplotypes of representatives of the cosmopolitan peoples of north-central Mexico were studied. Two hundred twenty-three samples from individuals residing in vicinities of two localities in north-central Mexico were analyzed. A combination of strategies was employed to identify the origin of each haplotype, including length variation analysis of the COII and tRNALYS intergenic region, nucleotide sequence analysis of control region hypervariable segment 1, and RFLP analysis of PCR products spanning diagnostic sites. Analysis of these data revealed that the majority of the mtDNA haplotypes were of Native American origin, belonging to one of four primary Native American haplogroups.
Others were of European or African origin, and the frequency of African haplotypes was equivalent to that of haplotypes of European derivation. These results provide diagnostic, discrete character, molecular genetic evidence that, together with results of previous studies of classical genetic systems, is informative with regard to both the magnitude of African admixture and the relative maternal contribution of African, European, and Native American peoples to the genetic heritage of Mexico. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that African sequences formed a basal, paraphyletic group.”
quote:I stated the political side of things years ago. And it was clearly visible in the last ten years on social media.
Originally posted by Elmaestro:
Has anyone in this space ever wondered what would have been the case if any of the African samples with Northeast African or Egyptian related ancestry were sequenced and published before the Raqefet Natufian were?
Let me note with a degree of certainty that if:(
the Pastoral Neolithic Samples, Taforalt, IAM or Oub02, Skhirat, The ancient Swahili, Kulubnarti and christian Nubian samples, or even Abusir el Meleq.) ..any of these samples were published before the Natufian, a lot would have been different in these spaces.
[_]
That aside I don't think academia has been improved, and with that being said, I don't think the issue is the amount of "white dudes" in academia. For one there are many cultural representatives contributing to these publications. Also, it's inconceivable to me that so much people white or not will enter the field with such bad intentions. I believe its just cumulative bias built from anti-black and anti-African foundation. Part of what hold this "conscious bubble" together nowadays is the almost universal perception of black people as primitive. This is an idea that was bolstered by propaganda and scientific publication starting by at least late 19th century. It is a pervasive idea which is at the stem of even some of the most progressive personalities. And to be honest, the progressive types are the worst as their ideals are often not in a place to be challenged. These guys are like PETA, in the case which the "A" stands for African.
Aside from the bias, I personally believe there is some politics involved. Take it as an anecdote as I can't say anything about it now. But we've likely arrived past a tipping point in which it'd take decades to fix. The Cleopatra thing was pretty much the nail in the coffin as far as public perception goes. And there's a certain idea being pushed to where North West Africans and East Africans will become residual. Afrocentrism takes a lot of public heat but as far as influence goes it's merely a niche. I can't fully explain how the criticisms became more influential than the "movement" but that where we are.
quote:Summarize the fields of Africana studies. So we can have a better understanding what you're taking about.
Originally posted by Antalas:
I strongly disagree with the "it's a minority" "we make fun of them." This is a false impression simply because most people of African descent in the diaspora may not initially show a strong interest in history. However, upon discussing the topic, you'll find that many of them do indeed hold Afrocentric beliefs and theories. Even within the academic field, several black scholars demonstrate clear biases, like SOY Keita or that clown of "Molefi Asante," of whom I recently read an article where he suggests that Septimius Severus was black solely because he hailed from Africa. I couldn't believe this was actually published...
Furthermore, I was surprised to learn about the existence of black academies in the US, where the majority of students and teachers are black. Of course and no surprise these institutions tend to teach Afrocentric theories when it comes to history.
quote:This is partially true that Arabs invaded North Africa and that North Africans in some cases feel more commonality with Arabs. This has a deep rooted history in Eurocentrism. But of course it's much easer to blame Afrocentrism, right?
Originally posted by Antalas:
In my personal experience, particularly online, I've encountered very few black individuals who were not proponents of Afrocentrism. Additionally, in real life, there's a persistent belief among some SSAs that North Africans are seen as Arab invaders. However, I won't blame them because that's how most North Africans identify and how they are viewed by Europeans.
quote:That's true, and well observed.
Originally posted by Djehuti:
^ Indeed extremists exists on both sides so if some people are are "blackcentric", then there are those who are obviously "whitecentric". Though some Eurocentrics are smarter than that and don't cling to "whiteness" instead if dark skin is found in Paleolithic Europeans and even Neanderthals they then use dark-skin as a non-factor to whether someone is African or more specifically 'Sub-Saharan' or not. Hence many Afrocentrics still fall into their okie-doke trap.
quote:This ignorance is certainly real. However it's even more ridiculous to claim that there was no Black (dark skinned) individuals in the Nile Valley region for thousands of years and the inhibitors were actually from eurasian back migrations.
Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Yes, extremists exist both among African Americans and Europeans/European Americans. I just saw an example online how several Afrocentrists obviously could not take that an Egyptian woman showed a video about an ancient Egyptian statue, which they thought was too light, or did not conform to their ideas of how ancient Egyptians ought to look like.
So a dark skinned Ötzi, or a pale Egyptian statue obviously attracts angry "centrists" from both sides.
quote:African American admixtures
Intertribal marriage is historically common among many Native American tribes, both prior to European contact and in the present. Historically, tribal conflicts might result in the eventual adoption of, or marriages with, captives taken in warfare, with former foes becoming full members of the community. Individuals often have ancestry from more than one tribe, and this became increasingly common after so many tribes lost family members to colonial invasions bringing disease, war and massacres. Bands or entire tribes were often reduced to very small numbers, and at times split or merged to form stronger communities in reaction to these pressures.
Tribes with long trading histories with Europeans show a higher rate of European admixture, reflecting admixture events between Native American women and European men.
The Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism has also said that haplogroup testing is not a valid means of determining Native American ancestry, and that the concept of using genetic testing to determine who is or is not Native American threatens tribal sovereignty.Author of Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science, Kim TallBear (Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate), agrees, stating that not only is there no DNA test that can indicate a tribe, but "there is no DNA-test to prove you're Native American."Tallbear writes in Native American DNA that while a DNA test may bring up some markers associated with some Indigenous or Asian populations, the science in these cases is problematic,as Indigenous identity is not about one distant (and possibly nonexistent) ancestor, but rather political citizenship, culture, kinship, and daily, lived experience as part of an Indigenous community.She adds that a person, "… could have up to two Native American grandparents and show no sign of Native American ancestry. For example, a genetic male could have a maternal grandfather (from whom he did not inherit his Y chromosome) and a paternal grandmother (from whom he did not inherit his mtDNA) who were descended from Native American founders, but mtDNA and Y-chromosome analyses would not detect them."
Given all these factors, DNA testing is not sufficient to qualify a person for specific tribal membership, as the ethnicity admixture tests cannot distinguish among Native American tribes. They cannot even reliably indicate Native American ancestry.
"Native American markers" are not found solely among Native Americans. While they occur more frequently among Native Americans, they are also found in people in other parts of the world.
The only use of DNA testing by legitimate tribes is that some, such as the Meskwaki, may use DNA for paternity tests, or similar confirmation that an applicant who was not enrolled at birth is the biological child of an enrolled tribal member. It is solely about confirming or ruling out biological paternity, and has no relationship to race or ethnicity.
quote:Source wikipedia
DNA testing and research has provided some data about the extent of Native American ancestry among African Americans, which varies in the general population. Based on the work of geneticists, Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. hosted a popular, and at times controversial, PBS series, African American Lives, in which geneticists said DNA evidence shows that Native American ancestry is far less common among African Americans than previously believed. Their conclusions were that while almost all African Americans are racially mixed, and many have family stories of Native heritage, usually these stories turn out to be inaccurate, with only 5 percent of African American people showing more than 2 percent Native American ancestry.
Gates summarized these statistics to mean that, "If you have 2 percent Native American ancestry, you had one such ancestor on your family tree five to nine generations back (150 to 270 years ago)."Their findings also concluded that the most common "non-Black" mix among African Americans is English and Scots-Irish. Some critics thought the PBS series did not sufficiently explain the limitations of DNA testing for assessment of heritage.Another study, published in the American Journal of Human Genetics, also indicated that, despite how common these family stories are, relatively few African-Americans who have these stories actually turned out to have detectable Native American ancestry.A study reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics stated, "We analyzed the European genetic contribution to 10 populations of African descent in the United States (Maywood, Illinois; Detroit; New York; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Baltimore; Charleston, South Carolina; New Orleans; and Houston) ... mtDNA haplogroups analysis shows no evidence of a significant maternal Amerindian contribution to any of the 10 populations." Despite this, some still insist that most African Americans have at least some Native American heritage.
quote:
African Americans constitute the second largest racial group in the U.S. after White Americans, as well as the third largest ethnic group after Hispanic and Latino Americans.[ Most African Americans are descendants of enslaved people within the boundaries of the present United States. On average, African Americans are of West/Central African with some European descent; some also have Native American and other ancestry.
According to U.S. Census Bureau data, African immigrants generally do not self-identify as African American. The overwhelming majority of African immigrants identify instead with their own respective ethnicities (~95%). Immigrants from some Caribbean and Latin American nations and their descendants may or may not also self-identify with the term.
quote:Note-
Harvard University historian Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote in 2009 that "African Americans...are a racially mixed or mulatto people—deeply and overwhelmingly so" (see genetics).
quote:White Americans
African Americans/Genetics
Genome-wide studies
Recent surveys of African Americans using a genetic testing service have found varied ancestries which show different tendencies by region and sex of ancestors. These studies found that on average, African Americans have 73.2–82.1% West African, 16.7%–24% European, and 0.8–1.2% Native American genetic ancestry, with large variation between individuals.Genetics websites themselves have reported similar ranges, with some finding 1 or 2 percent Native American ancestry and Ancestry.com reporting an outlying percentage of European ancestry among African Americans, 29%.
According to a genome-wide study by Bryc et al. (2009), the mixed ancestry of African Americans in varying ratios came about as the result of sexual contact between West/Central Africans (more frequently females) and Europeans (more frequently males). Consequently, the 365 African Americans in their sample have a genome-wide average of 78.1% West African ancestry and 18.5% European ancestry, with large variation among individuals (ranging from 99% to 1% West African ancestry). The West African ancestral component in African Americans is most similar to that in present-day speakers from the non-Bantu branches of the Niger-Congo (Niger-Kordofanian) family.
Correspondingly, Montinaro et al. (2014) observed that around 50% of the overall ancestry of African Americans traces back to the Niger-Congo-speaking Yoruba of southwestern Nigeria and southern Benin, reflecting the centrality of this West African region in the Atlantic Slave Trade. The next most frequent ancestral component found among African Americans was derived from Great Britain, in keeping with historical records. It constitutes a little over 10% of their overall ancestry, and is most similar to the Northwest European ancestral component also carried by Barbadians. Zakharaia et al. (2009) found a similar proportion of Yoruba associated ancestry in their African-American samples, with a minority also drawn from Mandenka and Bantu populations. Additionally, the researchers observed an average European ancestry of 21.9%, again with significant variation between individuals. Bryc et al. (2009) note that populations from other parts of the continent may also constitute adequate proxies for the ancestors of some African-American individuals; namely, ancestral populations from Guinea Bissau, Senegal and Sierra Leone in West Africa and Angola in Southern Africa.
Altogether, genetic studies suggest that African Americans are a genetically diverse people. According to DNA analysis led in 2006 by Penn State geneticist Mark D. Shriver, around 58 percent of African Americans have at least 12.5% European ancestry (equivalent to one European great-grandparent and his/her forebears), 19.6 percent of African Americans have at least 25% European ancestry (equivalent to one European grandparent and his/her forebears), and 1 percent of African Americans have at least 50% European ancestry (equivalent to one European parent and his/her forebears). According to Shriver, around 5 percent of African Americans also have at least 12.5% Native American ancestry (equivalent to one Native American great-grandparent and his/her forebears). Research suggests that Native American ancestry among people who identify as African American is a result of relationships that occurred soon after slave ships arrived in the American colonies, and European ancestry is of more recent origin, often from the decades before the Civil War.
According to U.S. Census Bureau data, African immigrants generally do not self-identify as African American. The overwhelming majority of African immigrants identify instead with their own respective ethnicities (~95%).Immigrants from some Caribbean and Latin American nations and their descendants may or may not also self-identify with the term.
________________________
Note- in real life some black or african americans just like white americans and native americans do not have any other race admixture.
Well most black americans may have european dna but it still not significant enough.For it be significant and impact phenotype it needs to be 25% or up and that is not always the case for some.Having 1% asian or native american dna is really small and not significant as well and does not impact phenotype as well. Most white americans have other race admixture as well but tends to be smaller on average then the average black american real life race admixture but they have race admixture and for most of then too it's insignificant.
By the way in comicbook superhero stories,shows,movies etc.. most white and black americans do not have any other race admixture and when a few do it's simplified.So the person is either 100% black or white,50% or 75% etc..
By way most latino/hispanic americans in comics are not white and are not classified as white,while in real life most are classified as white.
quote:Admixture in Hispanic whites
Admixture
Admixture in non-Hispanic whites
White Americans (European Americans) on average are: 98.6 percent European, 0.19 percent African and 0.18 percent Native American. Inferred British/Irish ancestry is found in European Americans from all states at mean proportions of above 20%, and represents a majority of ancestry, above 50% mean proportion, in states such as Mississippi, Arkansas, and Tennessee. Scandinavian ancestry in European Americans is highly localized; most states show only trace mean proportions of Scandinavian ancestry, while it comprises a significant proportion, upwards of 10%, of ancestry in European Americans from Minnesota and the Dakotas.
DNA analysis on White Americans by geneticist Mark D. Shriver showed an average of 0.7% Sub-Saharan African admixture and 3.2% Native American admixture. The same author, in another study, claimed that about 30% of all White Americans, approximately 66 million people, have a median of 2.3% of Black African admixture. Shriver discovered his ancestry is 10 percent African, and Shriver's partner in DNA Print Genomics, J.T. Frudacas, contradicted him two years later stating "Five percent of European Americans exhibit some detectable level of African ancestry."
Older studies have also been performed. In a 2007 study, Gonçalves et al. reported Sub-Saharan and Amerindian mtDNA lineages at a frequency of 3.1% (respectively 0.9% and 2.2%) in a sample of 1387 American Caucasians as compared to 62% in white Brazilians (respectively 29% and 33%), 98% for white Colombians (respectively 8% and 90%) and similarly high levels for Argentines, Chileans, and Costa Ricans. A 2003 study on Y-chromosomes and mtDNA found African admixture in European-Americans to be "below the limits of detection".
quote:Source wikipedia
In contrast to non-Hispanic or Latino whites, whose average European ancestry is 98.6%, genetic research has found that the average European admixture among White Hispanic and Latino Americans is 73%, while the average European admixture for Hispanic Americans overall (regardless of their self-identified race) is 65.1%.
quote:
Most white americans in real life have recent african admixture and native american dna.
White hispanic/latino americans have higher non european dna,so if you combine white americans and white latino americans then the non europeans dna for white americans is higher.
quote:The issue is not admixture, the issue is that some come with this replacement theory and call the actual Native Americans / Amerindians fake, or recent immigrant from Asia to actually replace (them) ABOS.
Originally posted by Firewall:
Just posting dna info from other sources that are updated for the varied groups in america.I saw some dna info above so i wanted to post dna info and well.
This thread also stays in one place as well unlike most other ones.
The gates thing was just connected to that post from the other thread i just did not feel to leave out.